From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>,
"Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>,
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] c-family, middle-end: Add __builtin_c[lt]zg (arg, 0ULL) exception
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2023 09:31:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZVsZfQvLKT0u1wIk@tucnak> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87zfz8rg5q.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 09:18:57AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Richard Biener:
>
> > Ugh. First of all I don't like that the exception is applied during
> > folding. As for the problem of multi evaluation can't consumers use
> > stmt expressions for this, say
> >
> > {( auto __tem = value; __builtin_xyz (__tem, __typeof (__tem)); ... )}
> >
> > ? Thus use 'auto' to avoid spelling 'value' multiple times?
>
> {( … )} cannot be used in a constant expression, but the new macros are
> supposed to be usable there.
I'm not sure about that, it would be nice for them to be usable there,
but I think e.g. none of Joseph's implementation of those macros
made them usable there (except inside of sizeof/typeof/typeof_unquall)
and I don't see a requirement in the C23 standard that they must be usable
in constant expressions.
The versions I've posted on Thursday were usable there except for
stdc_has_single_bit (but that actually can be implemented that way too)
and stdc_bit_floor. And the version I haven't posted that used the 3
patches posted on Saturday would have all functions usable when the
argument to those macros is a constant expression.
BTW, if we go route of implementing all of the stdc_ type-generic macros
as builtins, we could as well not implement that way the following 4
# define stdc_first_leading_one(x) (__builtin_clzg (x, -1) + 1U)
# define stdc_first_trailing_one(x) (__builtin_ctzg (x, -1) + 1U)
# define stdc_count_ones(x) ((unsigned int) __builtin_popcountg (x))
# define stdc_has_single_bit(x) ((_Bool) (__builtin_popcountg (x) == 1))
which are implementable without any new extensions.
Jakub
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-20 8:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-18 19:30 Jakub Jelinek
2023-11-20 7:44 ` Richard Biener
2023-11-20 7:49 ` Richard Biener
2023-11-20 8:19 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-11-21 0:12 ` Joseph Myers
2023-11-21 8:30 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-11-20 8:13 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-11-20 8:18 ` Florian Weimer
2023-11-20 8:31 ` Jakub Jelinek [this message]
2023-11-20 8:37 ` Richard Biener
2023-11-20 8:48 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-11-20 8:58 ` Richard Biener
2023-11-21 5:59 ` Martin Uecker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZVsZfQvLKT0u1wIk@tucnak \
--to=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
--cc=rguenther@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).